Remember folks, wells implements stacked ranking when it comes to review time. There will always be someone that has to take the hit with a bad review. Not everyone can be good! Which is obviously not true, but that's how it goes 🤷♂️
8 replies (most recent on top)
@1lpc+1tzcpH8d States the truth HOWEVER, all bigwigs know there is no other way to do it so we have to apply forced distribution.
Stacked ranking, forced bell curve is explicitly prohibited per policy (you can look it up). Calibration just gets managers grading in the same standards. Or so is the hope.
In my group we get push back for ratings that are higher than meets, but no one has ever asked me to reduce a meets to IM. I didn't have any IM or IN this round and the reviews are done. Zero push to 'fill' that end of the bell curve.
It's always been a bell curve. If you are not the bosses bud, you will get a middling "3" no matter how good you are. One day the diamond, next day the stone. Banking su-ks, take whatever bonus you get and and open a bike shop in Vermont!
“Guided distribution” is the gas lighting term they use in our lob. But guess what? We calibrate and recalibrate until we get our 20% to im and just make up stuff to justify it.
I received my exceeds rating last year, so I’m expecting a meets or possibly lower this time to allow the next person in our group to get the higher rating. Such is life on the ‘ol stagecoach.
Lame excuse for incompetent managers to dodge accountability and giving baseless poor reviews.
It's not stacked ranking, it's "calibration".